Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! ×

Comment Re:The good ones (Score 1) 69

The US is bankrupt; just cutting to the chase of it all. In essence, oversupply of labor (in any field) puts deflationary pressure on value. Here in the US, the government is printing money to support an employed workforce. Meanwhile, the Indian and Hispanic birthrate is outstripping demand, so expect the wages to drop further in the global IT market.

Deflation, marked with inflation = FUCKED!

What's the answer? There is none. But what can not going on forever, wont; and you can take that to the bank.

I recon WW3 to be honest. It's not want I want, but historically strife leads to war; so there you have it.

Comment Re:Terrorists don't know about connecting flights? (Score 1) 180

Or this has nothing to do with security? It's funny that only airports that don't have American carriers were targeted by this ban. So now if I have to go to one of these cities I can take one of these foreign carriers and not have access to my electronics or I can take an American carrier to have access to my electronics on the long part of the flight with a short connection flight. Wonder what a lot of people will do.

If they were really worried about a fake iPad holding explosives they could have worked with the airports to ensure that additional testing was done and to make sure that the electronics were turned on. It's not like you can fill an iPad with explosives and still keep it working. And notice that I said work with, not take over the security. But all their measures have done is put the dangerous device into the cargo hold where it still is dangerous. You just don't know what it's next to when it blows up, if it exists.

Comment Re:Typical of America. It always belittles... (Score 1) 69

Needless to say, he returned to our company as a consultant on some project that had incurred budgetary overruns and incompetency.

All at the hands of our so-called American trained "engineers."

I can't speak to the specifics of this situation but I have seen others where the desires of in-house personnel were ignored but when the same initiatives are suggested by a consultant, they're followed with gusto.

Don't blame the engineers, blame the management.

LK

Comment Re:"Resources"? How about "Inventory"? (Score 2) 69

Mike Nefkens, of HP Enterprise, soon to be DXC Technology, responded to a question about layoffs by referring to employees as "inventory" and stating, "well, you have to rotate inventory, right? Get rid of the old, obsolete stuff in favor of the new, fresh stuff"

Fact of the matter is, in a services company like HPE's ES, people are your assets, and knowledge, skill, and talent are valuable things not worth flushing away. Same goes for those customer-facing employees who have built relationships, or SMEs who build and maintain customer-facing applications.

I'd rather be called a "Resource" than "Inventory". HP/HPE/DXC has spent the last few years trashing morale and blissfully opening the floodgates wide open for brain drain, to replace experienced (but higher paid) people with warm bodies to satisfy existing contracts. IBM is following suit.

Comment Re:plausible? (Score 1) 180

X-ray images would likely defeat both of your ideas, because the battery cell would look different on an X-ray than the explosive material. If it's all uniform, then it would probably be easier to get it through.

Of course with the average attention span of a poorly-paid TSA agent going into hour number 6 of staring at bags going by on the conveyor, they may not spot anything anyway.

Comment Re:plausible? (Score 1) 180

Didn't bother to read the summary? There's a reason why they are restricting from the cabin and not the cargo hold - if you can put one of these things right next to a window, there's a far better chance of creating a breach than if it's in the middle of a suitcase, in the middle of the fuselage.

Short version, since you appear to be attention challenged: Aircraft windows are weaker than fuselage, and if you can't put it next to a window, then there's a better chance of the aircraft surviving the detonation.

Slashdot Top Deals

The aim of science is to seek the simplest explanations of complex facts. Seek simplicity and distrust it. -- Whitehead.

Working...